Sunday, 4 March 2012

One of the favourite themes of this blog is the politically correct indoctrination that European children are now subject to in our schools, particularly in the teaching of history. Another disturbing trend I've noticed is the insertion of politically-correct pro-Islam propaganda into general historical works. This literature is not aimed at the educational market; it is written for the typical interested adult consumer of historical writing.

Some historical literature could be classed as dedicated propaganda, for example the books that attempt to portray the crusaders in the most sinister light or those that conjure up the myth of a paradisaical Al-Andalus. Perhaps more pernicious than these, though, are the works on themes that have no obvious relation to Islam. Even there, I'm finding, the odd bit of pro-Islam unhistorical nonsense is just, almost randomly, thrown in. This shows how successful the previous propaganda efforts have been, when even scholars and knowledgeable writers have been infected by the lies, even if Islam is outwith their real area of speciality.

I'll record examples of this as in this post as I come across them.

Let's start with "A Brief History of Britain 1066-1485" by Nicholas Vincent. You'd think it would be fairly hard to work some pro-Islam propaganda into that topic, but multicultists are determined and ingenious.
With their songs of Roland and Charlemagne, it is arguable the Normans were already acquiring a veneer of chivalry and polite manners, imported from the most part from further south, from the princely courts of Aquitaine and ultimately from Spain, from the court of the Arab caliphs. It was the distant civilising influence of Islam in the eleventh century which ultimately did most to smooth away the brutalities of European warfare.
Source: "A Brief History of Britain 1066-1485" by Nicholas Vincent

The most common of the pro-Islam historical lies now being propounded by non-Muslims is that, without Muslims, the classics of ancient Greece would have been lost to modern Europe.
A fact that might annoy contemporary Islamophobes is that we owe our knowledge of the Greek philosophers to Islam scholars who transcribed their texts into Arabic at a time when the Greek tongue had been lost in the West as a result of the dominance of Latin, the language of the Roman empire.

Arabic translators preserved classical thought, and it is from their texts that the Greeks eventually found their way into Latin in the twelfth century, and into the vernacular during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.
Source: "A Short History of Western Thought" by Stephen Trombley

This is a grotesque falsehood. I won't call it a lie since I can't know that the author doesn't sincerely believe what he is saying. But it is a falsehood that is now widespread and is being deliberately peddled and promoted because it is deemed to be politically useful.

The falsehood was devastatingly exposed by the French scholar Sylvain Gouguenheim in his book "Aristote au Mont-Saint-Michel : Les racines grecques de l'Europe chrétienne" [Aristotle of Mont-Saint-Michel: the Greek roots of Christian Europe]. He showed that knowledge of Greek had not died out in the misnamed Dark Ages, that the original Greek texts were still available and were being translated from Greek into Latin. The claim that these texts only survived because of intermediate translation into Arabic is simply false.

Incidentally, the publication of this book produced a ferocious attack on Gouguenheim from other so-called scholars in the field, steeped in political correctness as they were. There were demands for him to be expelled from his university and stripped of his membership in academic associations. His career has undoubtedly been adversely affected.

If you come across any other casual pro-Islamic falsehoods in works of history, post them in a comment below and I'll add them to the list.

5 comments:

Teddy Bear said...

'PC' can more realistically be interpreted as 'Petrified Cowards', but they conceal it to themselves by pretending their opinion is based on care and tolerance.

A graphic example would be to run a Google search of 'Islamic Contributions...'. One of the first sites to appear is Wikipedia who have a webpage devoted to it, despite it having nothing to do with Islam.

Undoubtedly there are many who are Muslims who have contributed in many fields, but it was more in spite of their religion than as a result of it. It was more the rule that the more hard-line religion took hold in any particular regime, the less was 'contributed'. Wikipedia prefer to ignore this uncomfortable fact however.

Anyone in doubt as to their real motive need only look on their site for 'Jewish contributions to society', which by their definition should surely be substantial, yet it seems to have been overlooked.

Likewise with the BBC who ran a piece called
Islam's 'forgotten story' and is about ...the "forgotten story" of 1000 years of Muslim science will open at the Science Museum in London today. It will feature triumphs of Islamic science and technology, including a six metre-high 13th century clock, medieval medical instruments and a model of Zheng.

The only contribution made by Jews, according to a similar search of the BBC, appears to be in the field of entertainment. Seems they prefer any other 'Jewish contributions' to become a forgotten story.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

Compare the Nobel prizes. Jews have won about a quarter of them. Muslims have won something like 4 and I think all but 1 of those was a peace prize and the one that wasn't was a joint award, if memory serves.

There are a few posts on the blog about bogus claims of Muslim scientific achievement. I actually bought the book that BBC series gave rise to. Haven't got round to reading it yet, though.

You sort of expect the BBC and Muslims themselves to lie, though. But when their lies are so successful that people educated to scholarly level start believing them, it somehow seems more frightening to me.

Passer by said...

Not to mention Byzantium. (A Greek Empire).
It ruled Italy during the 6 century and Southern Italy until the 12 century, so it had plenty of impact on "Western Europe". It had big cultural influence in Europe, for example the Cyrillic Alphabet was created by Byzantine scholars for the european slavs, it spread christianity in Eastern Europe and Russia, the first European University was the University of Constantinople, the biggest city in Europe was Constantinople, jews were threated fairly well in Bizantium, etc.
The golden byzantine coin, the nomisma, remained a standard of european commerce until the eleventh century.

Cheradenine Zakalwe said...

I've written about it before here and here.

Teddy Bear said...

Here's a word I'd like to see entered into the dictionary for all those whose own cowardice in the face of fundamentalist Muslims makes them choose to appease them instead of denounce them. Even worse is they then convince themselves that they are doing it because they are truly 'multicultural'.

The word is SCUM!
It's not just a derisive term for these lily livered 'heroes', but is derived from the word 'SUCCUMB', which they have done in the face of the Islamic agenda. It's also in keeping with the real translation of Islam, which is submission - not 'peace', as the BBC SCUM want you to believe.

Search

Loading...

Blog Archive

Powered by Blogger.

Blog Archive

Total Pageviews